Marion Barnes v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedAugust 23, 2007
Docket13-06-00409-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Marion Barnes v. State (Marion Barnes v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Marion Barnes v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion





NUMBER 13-06-409-CR



COURT OF APPEALS



THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS



CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

MARION BARNES, Appellant,



v.



THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the Aransas County Court at Law

of Aransas County, Texas.

MEMORANDUM OPINION



Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Benavides and Vela

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Benavides

Appellant Marion Barnes, appearing pro se, asks us to review the legal and factual sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction for taking oysters from a restricted area in Aransas County. Tex. Parks & Wild. Code Ann. § 76.116(a) (Vernon 2002). Due to lack of adequate briefing, we must affirm the judgment of the district court. Tex. R. App. P. 38.1.

We recognize that persons who appear pro se are entitled to greater leniency when construing the meaning of their pleadings. Wheeler v. Green, 157 S.W.3d 439, 444 (Tex. 2005). Nevertheless, pro se litigants are not exempt from the rules of procedure. Id. (citing Mansfield State Bank v. Cohn, 573 S.W.2d 181, 184-85 (Tex. 1978)). An appellant's brief, for example, "must contain a clear and concise argument for the contentions made, with appropriate citations to authority and to the record." Tex. R. App. P. 38.1(h) (emphasis added). This court cannot remedy deficiencies in a litigant's brief or provide an adequate record when none is presented by the appellant. Green v. Kaposta, 152 S.W.3d 839, 841 (Tex. App.-Dallas 2005, no pet.).

In the instant case, Barnes's argument contains no citations to case law, statutory authority, the clerk's record, or the reporter's record. The brief, therefore, fails to meet even the most lenient and rudimentary application of the rules of appellate procedure. Without an argument to evaluate, we have no case to decide.

Therefore, we AFFIRM.



_________________________

GINA M. BENAVIDES,

Justice

Do not publish.

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

Memorandum Opinion delivered and

filed this the 23rd day of August, 2007.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Wheeler v. Green
157 S.W.3d 439 (Texas Supreme Court, 2005)
Green v. Kaposta
152 S.W.3d 839 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2005)
Mansfield State Bank v. Cohn
573 S.W.2d 181 (Texas Supreme Court, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Marion Barnes v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marion-barnes-v-state-texapp-2007.